124 replies to this topic

[WarHippy]

cdlord, on 05 December 2014 - 12:14 PM, said:

Read the OP and I like it. Can I add a thought?

Since they cannot do 12v10, the IS Company vs the Clan Binary, further adjusting the available tonnage per side might be another way to implement this dynamic. Now, I know the Clans are nerfed to hell and gone from their original TT counterparts, but the tonnage gap doesn't have to be that large. Just something to balance the superiority.

Traditionally in war the attacking force needs to be larger than the defending force if the attackers are going to have a chance to succeed. This is because the defenders are usually in fortified positions with home turf advantage. That being said in the case of CW the defenders are protected by a series of walls and I would then assume having the attacking Clans at the same weight amount already puts them at a disadvantage. If anything the attacking force should probably be given a small weight advantage over the defenders, and that applies to IS vs IS as well as Clan vs IS. We should probably see how it plays out first before we start looking to handicap anyone.

[Bishop Steiner]

WarHippy, on 05 December 2014 - 12:29 PM, said:

Yes, I understand that, but I was pointing out that having a bunch of the 195 ton limits and 240 being the only other alternative the people that would like large drops are not going to have many if any choices for their particular form of fun. As I have said several times now I'm ok with having some smaller drop decks so long as there are options for larger drop decks as well.

which is why I also am recommending to have some that may have 300-320 ton drop limits. Depending on world and contract (for instance, Hesperus II, Tharkad, Rasalhague, Luthien, etc, we would realistically see a LOT of heavier unti sfightin gfor. But some missions and contracts even on those planets, would be best handled by faster (ie, Lighter) response units.

[Kain Demos]

Eventually it would be cool to see planets that had differen 'mech limits as well. Imagine a 2 'mech, 110 ton planet or 3 'mech 155 ton planet.

[Rebas Kradd]

WarHippy, on 05 December 2014 - 11:56 AM, said:

I don't have a problem with some planets having small drop decks so long as they allow for some to have large drop decks(I'm talking in the 300 range) because in lore it wasn't always a bunch of small mechs running around. Sometimes the big boys came out to play, and when they came out they came in force.

I fear you might have misread my post, because I didn't suggest at all that EVERY planet should be lower than 195. There should absolutely be 240 planets and perhaps higher. And mathematically, I do think that 240 offers enough range.

When it comes to pure "fun", that's what we have pugs and private matches for. Community Warfare is a recreation of the Clan invasion and should carry with it a degree of realism.

Edited by Rebas Kradd, 05 December 2014 - 12:57 PM.

[CDLord HHGD]

WarHippy, on 05 December 2014 - 12:38 PM, said:

Traditionally in war the attacking force needs to be larger than the defending force if the attackers are going to have a chance to succeed. This is because the defenders are usually in fortified positions with home turf advantage. That being said in the case of CW the defenders are protected by a series of walls and I would then assume having the attacking Clans at the same weight amount already puts them at a disadvantage. If anything the attacking force should probably be given a small weight advantage over the defenders, and that applies to IS vs IS as well as Clan vs IS. We should probably see how it plays out first before we start looking to handicap anyone.

It's a 3:1 advantage if memory serves.... Though no game is ever going to accurately represent a siege mechanic. Nobody to my knowledge has properly simulated the entirety of entropy based warfare.

[Bishop Steiner]

Give tonnage edge to attackers, but possibly allow surviving defender mechs to reload, so that one doesn't have to suicide an ammo mech to be useful if runs out of ammo? (represents defender has an armory, which possibly should also be a target?)

[CDLord HHGD]

Bishop Steiner, on 05 December 2014 - 01:00 PM, said:

Give tonnage edge to attackers, but possibly allow surviving defender mechs to reload, so that one doesn't have to suicide an ammo mech to be useful if runs out of ammo? (represents defender has an armory, which possibly should also be a target?)

I like the thought of a reload mechanic in the game, but it has to look legit and it has to take time. Whether that time is worth it, only time and testing will tell.

I think logistical support is something we could really make good use of. More info to come once I've had a chance to marinate in CW and look for ways to improve....

[WarHippy]

Rebas Kradd, on 05 December 2014 - 12:55 PM, said:

I fear you might have misread my post, because I didn't suggest at all that EVERY planet should be lower than 195. There should absolutely be 240 planets and perhaps higher. And mathematically, I do think that 240 offers enough range.

When it comes to pure "fun", that's what we have pugs and private matches for. Community Warfare is a recreation of the Clan invasion and should carry with it a degree of realism.

If you actually suggested somewhere that there should be some higher than 240 I apologize, but from what I could see you were pretty hell bent on some being 240 and the rest being even lower. You might find that fun, but that isn't the case for everyone. Telling them that if they want something different they should just play private matches and pugs matches like you just stated here only tells me that I didn't misread anything. You want what you think is fun to be the standard for everyone else and screw anyone who disagrees. The Clan invasion wasn't exclusively fought in smaller mechs, and some battles were fought with large numbers of heavies and assaults. You want realism for the Clan invasion? Then some of the planets need to be higher than 240.

cdlord, on 05 December 2014 - 12:56 PM, said:

It's a 3:1 advantage if memory serves.... Though no game is ever going to accurately represent a siege mechanic. Nobody to my knowledge has properly simulated the entirety of entropy based warfare.

The only game that I ever played that came close was Shadowbane when sieging player controlled cities. It generally took a much larger force to capture a city than it took to defend one.

[Molossian Dog]

cdlord, on 05 December 2014 - 12:56 PM, said:

It's a 3:1 advantage if memory serves.... Though no game is ever going to accurately represent a siege mechanic. Nobody to my knowledge has properly simulated the entirety of entropy based warfare.

How do you "play" hunger and dysentery? Not sure that would be fun.

Quest 1: Find a clean latrine.
Quest 2: Jump&run episode not to fall into the latrine.

Edited by Molossian Dog, 05 December 2014 - 01:12 PM.

[WarHippy]

Bishop Steiner, on 05 December 2014 - 01:00 PM, said:

Give tonnage edge to attackers, but possibly allow surviving defender mechs to reload, so that one doesn't have to suicide an ammo mech to be useful if runs out of ammo? (represents defender has an armory, which possibly should also be a target?)

Yeah that would make a lot of sense to me.

[Bishop Steiner]

cdlord, on 05 December 2014 - 01:03 PM, said:

I like the thought of a reload mechanic in the game, but it has to look legit and it has to take time. Whether that time is worth it, only time and testing will tell.

I think logistical support is something we could really make good use of. More info to come once I've had a chance to marinate in CW and look for ways to improve....

it's also why I only say reload, not repair, as the MFBs of the earlier titles were, tbh, DUMB. But in theory, a bay in the base should be able to hotload your mech in maybe 60 seconds, after shutdown? Ammo is in magazines, usually, so it's a matter of swapping magazines and and loading the feed.

Molossian Dog, on 05 December 2014 - 01:10 PM, said:

How do you "play" hunger and dysentery? Not sure that would be fun.

i have my catapults and plague victims ready.......

[zudukai]

i feel like a version of this could be very beneficial, lets develop this idea more, maybe run some simulations or theorycraft some more.

[Andi Nagasia]

Bishop Steiner, on 05 December 2014 - 01:12 PM, said:

it's also why I only say reload, not repair, as the MFBs of the earlier titles were, tbh, DUMB. But in theory, a bay in the base should be able to hotload your mech in maybe 60 seconds, after shutdown? Ammo is in magazines, usually, so it's a matter of swapping magazines and and loading the feed.

Personally though MFB where oddly implemented,
but i do think they have their place in MW, and MWO,

But they should Only Repair Armor that's Damaged, not internals or destroyed armor,
(as its possible in BT to Remove and Replace Damaged Armor, Quickly with Machines)
(if the Armor is Destroyed then what Attached it to the Internal Structure is as well)

and Refilling a Mechs Ammo works just as Repairing and Replacing Armor,
(opening or unbolting a Armored hatch and replacing internal ammo boxes)

to put things in perspective, your cars hood gets dented you take it to a MFB,
they take off your cars Hood(Armor) and replace it as well as your battery(Ammo),
if the hood was broken off, the hinges that hold it to the car would be broken as well,

Edit- Notation

Edited by Andi Nagasia, 05 December 2014 - 01:26 PM.

[Kirkland Langue]

cdlord, on 05 December 2014 - 12:56 PM, said:

It's a 3:1 advantage if memory serves.... Though no game is ever going to accurately represent a siege mechanic. Nobody to my knowledge has properly simulated the entirety of entropy based warfare.

I remember a particular battle in EVE where we sat on a gate for about 2 hours, waiting for the battle to begin, and once the order was given we jumped in.... and of course we all lagged out. I believe I was staring at a black screen for 4 hours. 4 HOURS.. waiting to load in my pod - as soon as I loaded, I crawled back to the gate, died while trying to jump out, grabbed a new ship and returned to jump back into the same gate.

I suspect that experience was more similar to real wartime experiences than anything else out there: having no idea what your situation was, waiting on the edge of your seat for hours, and when the moment of battle comes - it's over before you realize it.

[Rebas Kradd]

WarHippy, on 05 December 2014 - 01:10 PM, said:

You want what you think is fun to be the standard for everyone else and screw anyone who disagrees.

K...if you're just gonna edge towards the personal, I won't continue discussing it with you. But to address your point, I am not the only one who feels the way I do about lore, immersion, and weight class distribution. Don't take my word for it - read the rest of the thread. Lots of people feel that the current 3/3/3/3 misses the MechWarrior ethos. I understood it in pugs, for the sake of letting players freely use the mechs they'd bought. But CW has been explicitly designed and designated as a place for more lore-driven dynamics.

And not only do pugs and private matches allow plenty of freedom, but even CW itself will inevitably contain planets of 240 ton limits and possibly more (which I never addressed in the OP but seems sensible now that it's out there). The core of my pitch was that some planets carry more significance than others, and shaking up the planetary limits allows different strategy while planning large-scale movements.

Edited by Rebas Kradd, 05 December 2014 - 01:27 PM.

[terrycloth]

Duct tape the new armor onto the damaged hard points. It only needs to hold for a few minutes.

[WarHippy]

Rebas Kradd, on 05 December 2014 - 01:23 PM, said:

K...if you're just gonna edge towards the personal, I won't continue discussing it with you. But to address your point, I am not the only one who feels the way I do about lore, immersion, and weight class distribution. Don't take my word for it - read the rest of the thread. Lots of people feel that the current 3/3/3/3 misses the MechWarrior ethos. I understood it for the sake of letting players use the mechs they'd bought. But CW has been explicitly designed and designated as a place for more lore-driven dynamics.

I know you are not the only one that feels the way you do, but you seem to gloss over the fact that not everyone does feel the way you do. As for lore there are plenty of battles that consisted of large numbers of bigger mechs, and why I am advocating for some planets to have that as an option. 240 doesn't cut it. You keep bringing up lore this and lore that and how we need to move toward that, and I am all for it. The problem is that the lore did not consist of nothing but border skirmishes where lights and mediums were used in large amounts, and that sometimes they were massive battles with large mechs slugging it out. I have no problem with 195 ton limit worlds, I have no problems 240 limit worlds, but I do have a problem with people saying anything higher should be excluded because it doesn't fit their personal definition of what is lore friendly or not.

Rebas Kradd, on 05 December 2014 - 01:23 PM, said:

And not only do pugs and private matches allow plenty of freedom, but even CW itself will inevitably contain planets of 240 ton limits and possibly even more. Why does EVERY mode of play have to cater to a wide-open style?

Pug matches have a lot of freedom that is true, but ultimately they mean nothing. Private matches are a joke for anything beyond doing some training, or people doing things like stock mech Mondays. Why are you so hell bent on keeping CW as some sort of exclusive club for those who like the parts of lore that you like and everyone else should just be happy with second class status?

*edit* I see now in your edit you are open to some planets being more than 240 and that is all I was advocating for. So I think we can at least come to and agreement. I just wish you would tone it down on the lore stuff as the lore related stuff is more complicated than it is being made out to be.

Edited by WarHippy, 05 December 2014 - 01:46 PM.

[CDLord HHGD]

Molossian Dog, on 05 December 2014 - 01:10 PM, said:

How do you "play" hunger and dysentery? Not sure that would be fun.

Quest 1: Find a clean latrine.
Quest 2: Jump&run episode not to fall into the latrine.

I think the old Oregon Trail did a "decent" job for the time and tech... I was losing settlers to dysentery left and right.

[Johnny Z]

terrycloth, on 05 December 2014 - 01:33 PM, said:

Duct tape the new armor onto the damaged hard points. It only needs to hold for a few minutes.

I am 100% for mech sim but if they added a repair bay that could repair up to 50% armor in say 30 seconds or something I am for it because liquid metal exists today. This could be sprayed on in a short amount of time with a bit of speeding up for gameplay purposes even 1 minute isnt to much, what ever seems best.

A mech running around with a can of liquid metal doing armor repairs in the heat of battle would be a joke and no thanks. Maybe a huge slightly mobile base machine of some sort on tracks or the like doing repairs in a bay or something..

WarHippy, on 05 December 2014 - 01:40 PM, said:

I know you are not the only one that feels the way you do, but you seem to gloss over the fact that not everyone does feel the way you do. As for lore there are plenty of battles that consisted of large numbers of bigger mechs, and why I am advocating for some planets to have that as an option. 240 doesn't cut it. You keep bringing up lore this and lore that and how we need to move toward that, and I am all for it. The problem is that the lore did not consist of nothing but border skirmishes where lights and mediums were used in large amounts, and that sometimes they were massive battles with large mechs slugging it out. I have no problem with 195 ton limit worlds, I have no problems 240 limit worlds, but I do have a problem with people saying anything higher should be excluded because it doesn't fit their personal definition of what is lore friendly or not.
Pug matches have a lot of freedom that is true, but ultimately they mean nothing. Private matches are a joke for anything beyond doing some training, or people doing things like stock mech Mondays. Why are you so hell bent on keeping CW as some sort of exclusive club for those who like the parts of lore that you like and everyone else should just be happy with second class status?

edit*I see now in your edit you are open to some planets being more than 240 and that is all I was advocating for. So I think we can at least come to and agreement. I just wish you would tone it down on the lore stuff as the lore related stuff is more complicated than it is being made out to be.

I dont want to see anything higher than a 240 limit either. A 240 limit already allows 24 assaults to be on the field at the same time as it is!!!111!1!11

Edited by Johnny Z, 05 December 2014 - 01:48 PM.

[WarHippy]

Johnny Z, on 05 December 2014 - 01:46 PM, said:

I dont want to see anything higher than a 240 limit either. A 240 limit already allows 24 assaults to be on the field at the same time as it is!!!111!1!11

Then you must hate lore.